Facebook Follies of Friends and Families

[Richard Hakluyt]

I'd say that Jos is trying to outline the scale of the problem.

But then I broadly agree with him; our diffident acts to sort out climate change are grossly inadequate, we will need a complete re-engineering of our economic model to avoid catastrophic damage.

[Admiral Yi]

That's completely the opposite of what is being said here.
The original problem mentioned which started all this was the rise of a new Conservative attitude of people who (claim to) believe in climate change but who don't think we need to do anything as inevitably just switching to electric cars will be enough.

I have no exposure to the conservative people who think and talk this way.  Can you point out a couple to me?

[Josquius]

That's completely the opposite of what is being said here.
The original problem mentioned which started all this was the rise of a new Conservative attitude of people who (claim to) believe in climate change but who don't think we need to do anything as inevitably just switching to electric cars will be enough.

I have no exposure to the conservative people who think and talk this way.  Can you point out a couple to me?

You asked this already. Musk is the key one (albeit less inevitability and more buy buy buy from him).

Nobody will outright say this is their outlook so its hard to identify politicians following this approach. Truss seems a potential.

They are increasingly common online. Really seems to be where conservatism is evolving to as outright denial looks ever stupider.

[Admiral Yi]

You asked this already. Musk is the key one (albeit less inevitability and more buy buy buy from him).

Nobody will outright say this is their outlook so its hard to identify politicians following this approach. Truss seems a potential.

They are increasingly common online. Really seems to be where conservatism is evolving to as outright denial looks ever stupider.

Are the ones online saying it out loud, or are you reading their minds too? 

Seriously bro, it can be a little problematic when you state an inference (or something you made up if I'm being unkind) as fact.

[Josquius]

You asked this already. Musk is the key one (albeit less inevitability and more buy buy buy from him).

Nobody will outright say this is their outlook so its hard to identify politicians following this approach. Truss seems a potential.

They are increasingly common online. Really seems to be where conservatism is evolving to as outright denial looks ever stupider.

Are the ones online saying it out loud, or are you reading their minds too? 

Seriously bro, it can be a little problematic when you state an inference (or something you made up if I'm being unkind) as fact.

I am seeing it outright from people online and Musk.
From politicians it lines up with what they have said and seems logical that this is what they're going for.

[Berkut]

[
I am in favor of actually doing things to help the problem, you are apparently in favor of not doing things because the things done cannot perfectly solve the problem.

Who is deflecting?

That's completely the opposite of what is being said here.
The original problem mentioned which started all this was the rise of a new Conservative attitude of people who (claim to) believe in climate change but who don't think we need to do anything as inevitably just switching to electric cars will be enough.

Who here has taken up that claim?

[Berkut]

You asked this already. Musk is the key one (albeit less inevitability and more buy buy buy from him).

Nobody will outright say this is their outlook so its hard to identify politicians following this approach. Truss seems a potential.

They are increasingly common online. Really seems to be where conservatism is evolving to as outright denial looks ever stupider.

Are the ones online saying it out loud, or are you reading their minds too? 

Seriously bro, it can be a little problematic when you state an inference (or something you made up if I'm being unkind) as fact.

I am seeing it outright from people online and Musk.
From politicians it lines up with what they have said and seems logical that this is what they're going for.

Show me where Musk has said that climate change can be solved by everyone switching to electric cars.

Show me where anyone has said that.

Or not, since even if you can....so what? 

You found someone stupid saying something stupid? Congratulations?

The idea that this is some kind of mainstream concept sweeping the world is....bizarre.

[grumbler]

I'd say that Jos is trying to outline the scale of the problem.

But then I broadly agree with him; our diffident acts to sort out climate change are grossly inadequate, we will need a complete re-engineering of our economic model to avoid catastrophic damage.

Why do we need to re-engineer our economic model?  The current model explains and predicts economic behavior quite well, except in the a few rare cases.

And how could we re-engineer our economic model?  The existing model was developed using, in modern times, the scientific method.  If we abandon the scientific method to build economic models, what do we replace it with?

[HVC]

Everything tyr doesn't like is right wing. I'm surprised he hasn't claimed France is a vast right wing conspiracy

[grumbler]

Everything tyr doesn't like is right wing. I'm surprised he hasn't claimed France is a vast right wing conspiracy

That's the nature of virtue-signaling.  The enemy must be powerful,  monolithic, and evil or the virtue-signaler isn't a superhero.

[crazy canuck]

I'd say that Jos is trying to outline the scale of the problem.

But then I broadly agree with him; our diffident acts to sort out climate change are grossly inadequate, we will need a complete re-engineering of our economic model to avoid catastrophic damage.

Why do we need to re-engineer our economic model?  The current model explains and predicts economic behavior quite well, except in the a few rare cases.

And how could we re-engineer our economic model?  The existing model was developed using, in modern times, the scientific method.  If we abandon the scientific method to build economic models, what do we replace it with?

I agree with Richard, we, and here I mean the greenhouse emitting populations of the world, are not cutting our emissions quickly enough to avoid 1.5c of warming.

One explanation for that is the risks and costs of climate change are not, and perhaps cannot, be sufficiently recognized without significant political action and especially regulation.

But we lack the political will to do that.  To add to the problem we also seem to lack the political will to invest approximately in mitigation of the effects of climate change.

I am not sure some form of dramatic economic and political change is avoidable once a critical mass of us realize the status quo is not tenable.  What that change might be, I have no idea.

[Berkut]

Everything tyr doesn't like is right wing. I'm surprised he hasn't claimed France is a vast right wing conspiracy

That's the nature of virtue-signaling.  The enemy must be powerful,  monolithic, and evil or the virtue-signaler isn't a superhero.

Indeed. 

It is a way of gaining status. You set yourself up as the hero in the story.

It's the same reason conspiracy theories are so popular. You get to be the "smart one" who knows the truth everyone else is too stupid to see.

[HVC]

I think that's adding to much of a nefarious intention. It's simple. Cars=bad. Pollution is just another con to cars. Take away pollution and they're still bad. All bad things are right wing.

[grumbler]

I'd say that Jos is trying to outline the scale of the problem.

But then I broadly agree with him; our diffident acts to sort out climate change are grossly inadequate, we will need a complete re-engineering of our economic model to avoid catastrophic damage.

Why do we need to re-engineer our economic model?  The current model explains and predicts economic behavior quite well, except in the a few rare cases.

And how could we re-engineer our economic model?  The existing model was developed using, in modern times, the scientific method.  If we abandon the scientific method to build economic models, what do we replace it with?

I agree with Richard, we, and here I mean the greenhouse emitting populations of the world, are not cutting our emissions quickly enough to avoid 1.5c of warming.

One explanation for that is the risks and costs of climate change are not, and perhaps cannot, be sufficiently recognized without significant political action and especially regulation.

But we lack the political will to do that.  To add to the problem we also seem to lack the political will to invest approximately in mitigation of the effects of climate change.

I am not sure some form of dramatic economic and political change is avoidable once a critical mass of us realize the status quo is not tenable.  What that change might be, I have no idea.

I don't agree with you or Richard that any of this has to do with our economic model.  The supply and demand model seems to explain the broad economic system quite well.  The problem isn't the economic model, it is the various political systems which incentivize short-term economic thinking among the world's leading politicians.

It isn't like there is a big mystery as to how to reduce carbon emissions: cap and trade worked extraordinarily well in the US to reduce sulphur, mercury, and particulate emissions (meeting target goals of 99+% reduction a full decade ahead of schedule). The problem is that cap and trade on carbon would increase prices, and politicians fear that they won't get re-elected if they impose rules that raise prices.

No, the economic model works well.  It is the political model that fails us.

[Josquius]

Who here has taken up that claim?

Nobody. It helps to read the start of the discussion before jumping in.

Show me where Musk has said that climate change can be solved by everyone switching to electric cars.

Show me where anyone has said that.

Or not, since even if you can....so what?

So this is one of those cases where failure to provide a verbatim quote of him literally saying this means its completely false?
The Vegas loop nonsense and his opposition to high speed rail much?

Everything tyr doesn't like is right wing. 

You're speaking like this is some kind of failing on my part.
It's kind of standard that left wing people aren't big on right wing ideas and vice versa